Environmental Policy Task Force Meeting: Activities
at the July Environmental Policy Task Force Meeting chaired by David Ridenour
of The National Center for Public Policy Research (202/543-4110 or [email protected]).

Following the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee reporting
out of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA) on July 25, Michael
Hardiman of the American Land Rights Association reported that CARA's prospects
before the full Senate is uncertain, given the large number of pro-CARA
senators and the determined anti-CARA opposition. CARA is highly unpopular
with property rights groups, as it would significantly increase funding
for federal and state government purchases of private land. Currently, funding
for the federal Land, Water and Conservation Fund (LWCF), the main federal
fund for land acquisition, is $450 million. CARA would increase LWCF funding
to nearly $1 billion. In addition, CARA weould make more money available
for state land purchases. In total, CARA would cost up to $3 billion per
year for 15 years, creating a de facto $45 billion entitlement program that
would greatly increase government ownership of private land. Hardiman noted
that while most Republican members of the committee strongly opposed the
legislation, citing property rights and fiscal concerns, four Republicans
- committee chairman Frank Murkowski (R-AK), Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL), Gordon
Smith (R-OR) and Jim Bunning (R-KY) - sided with the committee's nine Democrats.
It is hard to assess CARA's future. On one hand, Hardiman says Majority
Leader Trent Lott (R-MS) is very much in favor of the legislation. Mississippi
is one of the bigger beneficiaries of CARA funding. However, says Hardiman,
Lott is wary of legislation that is divisive and time-consuming. Time is
perhaps the biggest ally of the anti-CARA senators as Lott's top priority
is to finish all of the appropriations bills and other legislation by early
October so senators can return home to campaign. Another factor that could
bode well for anti-CARA forces is that two of the eight anti-CARA Republicans
on the Energy and Natural Resources committee, Senator Don Nickles (R-OK)
and Senator Larry Craig (R-ID), are members of the Senate GOP leadership,
which might cause Lott to reconsider floor action. Likewise, Senator Pete
Domenici (R-NM), another committee member and Chairman of the Budget Committee,
is strongly opposed to CARA. Hardiman and Myron Ebell of the Competitive
Enterprise Institute (CEI) say that CARA's fate will come down to whether
the anti-CARA senators can cause enough acrimonious debate and delay to
force Lott to postpone a vote this year. Anti-CARA groups agree that CARA
would pass the Senate if anti-CARA senators can not prevent it from coming
to a vote. Contact Michael Hardiman at/202-251-3473 or Myron Ebell at CEI
at 202/331-1010 or [email protected].

Biotechnology Defended in Demonstration

James Plummer of Consumer Alert discussed a successful counter demonstration
conducted by Consumer Alert and CEI at a Washington D.C. Safeway supermarket
store picketed by anti-biotechnology protesters. The anti-biotechnology
protesters demanded that the Safeway supermarket chain stop selling products
genetically-modified through agricultural biotechnology, citing unfounded
claims that such products are unsafe. To dramatize their point, the protesters
entered the store, purchased biotechnology-modified products and then demanded
a refund. As part of their counter demonstration, the CEI and Consumer Alert
protesters promptly purchased the same biotechnology products - and did
not ask for a refund. Fortunately, Safeway says that it has no intention
of removing biotechnology products from its stores. Contact James Plummer
or Fran Smith at 202-467-5809 or [email protected].

Marlo Lewis of the House Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural
Resources and Regulatory Affairs announced that subcommittee chairman David
McIntosh (R-IN) has requested that the Energy Information Administration
do an analysis of the negative economic impact of legislative proposals
to regulate carbon dioxide. Lewis says the request was motivated by a worrisome
legislative proposal, loosely termed "Multi-Pollutant Strategies,"
that is supported by Senator Robert Smith (R-NH), chairman of the Senate
Environment and Public Works Committee. As part of an attempt to ease business
compliance with EPA regulations, the Smith-backed measure would include
carbon dioxide as a substance that EPA can regulate. Regulating carbon dioxide
would achieve a major goal of the unratified Kyoto Protocol, the treaty
that seeks to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to address the unproven global
warming threat. Contact Marlo Lewis at 202-225-4407 or [email protected].

Task Force Reviews Environmental Education Legislation

John Carlisle, director of the Environmental Policy Task Force, announced
that Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) is again pushing for passage of an environmental
education bill. In an attempt to stop EPA's misuse of a $10 million environmental
education fund to indoctrinate school children with controversial views,
Senator Inhofe wants to reauthorize the currently-unauthorized program and
include requirements for hearings to ostensibly ensure that EPA follows
sound science, not politics, in spending the money. But since hearings will
not force EPA to change its behavior, Carlisle said Inhofe's bill would
only legally enhance the environmental education program without reforming
it. Contact John Carlisle at 202/543-4110 or [email protected].

R.J. Smith of CEI reported that the Clinton Administration's heavy-handed
use of the 1906 Antiquities Act to declare vast areas of Western land National
Monuments is illegal. Smith said that the Antiquities Act was designed to
protect specific sites that have significant historical or archaeological
value such as ancient Indian caves. He said property rights lawyers are
looking into the possibility of filing a lawsuit challenging the Administration's
misuse of the law. Contact R.J. Smith at 202/331-1010 or [email protected].
*

Scoop is published by The National Center for Public Policy
Research to provide information about the activities of the conservative
movement. Coverage of a meeting or statement in Scoop does not imply endorsement
by The National Center for Public Policy Research. Copyright 2000 The National
Center for Public Policy Research. Reprints of articles in Scoop permitted
provided source is credited.